RAMBHAU Vs. GRAMIN VIKAS PRATISHTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Application has been filed by the original defendant in Regular Civil Suit No. 255 of 1999 pending on the file of the II Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Shrirampur, praying for quashing and setting aside of an order dated 16. 9. 2002 passed by the trial Court. By virtue of the interim order which had been passed at the time of admission of this Civil Revision Application, further proceedings in R. C. S. No. 255 of 1999 pending on the file of the II Joint Civil Judge, J. D. Shrirampur, has been stayed.

(2.) SUCH of the facts as are necessary for the decision of this Civil Revision Application may briefly be stated thus:-The respondent herein/original plaintiff had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 255 of 1999 contending therein that the present applicant who was working as Honorary trustee had taken an amount from the trust in excess of the expenses for the work to be carried out in the chilling plant. The plaintiff alleged that the total amount which the petitioner had taken from the respondent trust was about Rs. 1,62,000/- and the applicant/defendant had not accounted for an amount of Rs. 52,816/ -. It was also alleged that the applicant had purchased some material, which had not been deposited with the respondent trust. The plaintiff therefore filed the said suit for recovery of the alleged amount and also demanded the settlement of account. The applicant/defendant appeared in pursuance to the suit summons and filed his written statement raising a preliminary objection in respect of the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to entertain the suit in view of the bar created under section 50 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. It was specifically averred by the applicant/defendant that the plaintiff could not institute a suit without obtaining prior permission of the Charity Commissioner, and therefore, the suit filed by the plaintiff without obtaining prior permission of the Charity Commissioner as contemplated under section 51 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 was not maintainable. The applicant/defendant also filed an application at Exh. 20 and requested the trial Court to frame a preliminary issue as to whether the trial Court had jurisdiction to try the suit in the absence of the requisite permission being granted by the Charity Commissioner for filing the suit. Trial Court accordingly framed issue No. 4 as a preliminary issue in respect of jurisdiction and by the order which is impugned in the present revision dismissed the application filed by the applicant/defendant. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the trial Court dismissed the preliminary objection of the applicant/defendant on the ground that admittedly the suit was for recovery of money and for account of the said trust which was situated within the local jurisdiction of the Court and the Court also came to the conclusion that at the time of deciding the point of jurisdiction the Court had not to consider whether the previous consent of the Charity Commissioner was taken or not.

(3.) A reference at this juncture may usefully be made to Section 50 and 51 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, which read as under:-